A Plea to Pastors and Pastor Search Committees

The young man was absolutely smitten by her. But I knew, and I think deep down he knew, that he was stuck in the friend zone. She considered him a dear friend but nothing more.

But she never had the painful conversation with him. She never told him that their chances of being together were about as likely as being struck by lightning and winning the lottery on the same day.

And so he stayed in limbo. She knew his intentions but she didn’t do anything with them. She left him always wondering about her intentions. As a result he was never sure if he was totally free to pursue others.

Why did she keep the door open? Why didn’t she just crush him with the truth of her intentions—or lack thereof? Truth be told she liked having him in her pocket. If they hadthe conversation it would change things forever. He’d move on. And she wouldn’t have him as a fall back option. So she kept him on the hook just in case her other options fell through.

In other words don’t be like the girl who keeps a good friend in her pocket just in case the other options fall through. As soon as a person is no longer considered they should be contacted via email. It’d take about 15 minutes for someone to compile all the emails of the candidates. And about 3 minutes to send a mass email to let them know they are no longer being considered.

A Personal Anecdote

About five years ago when we were moving from Missouri to Louisville a particular church was in contact with us about coming on board. They requested an audio sermon. We weren’t set up very well for recording sermons but we figured out a way to get a couple sermons recorded.

I sent the audio to the church and heard NOTHING. Of course they may not have received the sermon. But I wouldn’t know that either because they never responded to my email where I enquired as to whether or not they had received the sermon.

So my only assumption was that they must have hated the sermon, thought I was terrible and that I was a heretic. I’m exaggerating a bit, but it was incredibly discouraging.

About six months later they contacted me and I learned the truth. The search committee was smitten by another prospective pastor. They liked his sermon better and so began the process of calling him to be the pastor. They went through the whole process only to be rejected by this prospective pastor.

So, naturally, they called up their option #2. Me. They had been keeping me in their pocket just in case the other fella didn’t work out. But much to their disappointment their #2 guy had also already moved on.

Conclusion

I don’t believe that pastor search committees are intentionally doing this to prospective pastors. Many of them are probably new to the process of calling a pastor. And it is likely that none of them have never been a prospective pastor and so they don’t know what it is like on the other end.

We need to educate our people on how to call a prospective pastor even while we are still there. These things need to be taught because this entire process is broken and needs to be fixed. Being faithful to communicate with prospective pastors is a huge step in the right direction.

So really this is a plea to pastors. Educate your people on the process. Prepare them for your departure.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About Mike Leake

Mike Leake is the lead pastor at FBC Marionville, MO. He is married to Nikki, and is the father to Isaiah and Hannah. Mike is currently pursuing an M.Div at SBTS...and by "currently pursuing" he means hoping Jesus returns before he has to take that final Hebrew class. Mike is the author of Torn to Heal and Jesus is All You Need.WebsiteTwitter

Mike, Thanks for the post. I had almost forgot that this actually goes on in the bizarre world of search committees. The last time I was involved in a search was 15 years ago, and certainly understand the dilemma that Pastors face when engaged in that type of thing.

If I were to change the process, I would encourage committees to have all the “prospective” men meet with them in person a minimum of 40 hours before they listen to him preach. Preaching can be very deceiving (especially recordings…technology can do wonders). Some guys just have the gift of gab, but not the gift and qualification to be Pastoring a flock as an Elder. If a committee is not committed to meeting with you for 40 hours at the beginning, I would not consider the church.

The other thing for younger Pastors (ones in their first church for instance). Get into the habit of leading the search committee, they typically have little understanding of what they are doing since it is a pretty foreign concept to scripture, so lay down some well defined plans of how you will engage in the process. Spend a lot of time with the church. If they don’t allow it….move on!

Ultimately, my goal would be to lead a church in such a way that they never have to do a pastoral search from outside sources again. In other words, I’d love to disciple people who make disciples so that the church can always train up a next generation of pastors.

It can and does happen!! That is exactly what the Apostle Paul was encouraging. Our church body is living proof of getting out of the “rat race” of searches.

In fact, we would welcome any qualified man into the congregation to use his gift of Pastoring. Its not like there is a lack of need in our church and in our community. We are always looking for qualified men aspiring to Pastor the church…. we can use them today. What a marvelous thing, to see the Holy Spirit work in the lives of men to preach, teach, and work hard at dividing the Word of God accurately.

In the meantime though,…and somehow instruct “search committees”, I would just encourage the men aspiring to that work to stand by their guns and demand that the church spend a lot of time with them.

So,….I listened to Mike’s “Wrath of God” sermon and Mike can preach….good stuff! Now, in order to really know Mike as a Pastor (and I really do hope to meet him some day) it will take more than just that experience,…it will take a good amount of time to really get to the qualifications that Holy Spirit has put forth in the scriptures and are expressed in his life. Many churches in the SBC, that follow the standard committee modus operandi, tend to forfeit the joy associated with getting to know the men that the Holy Spirit has gifted to lead the flock. Don’t get me wrong, churches get all excited just to get through the process…..much less agree on the man that made it through the gauntlet. Sometimes… I believe that process itself creates the wrong expectations.

The church that follows the traditional committee format are typically split right off the bat as well. Rarely do you see anything above an 80% “yes” vote for bringing a guy into the flock…. that is kinda sad on its own (of course some of you would have had a party at 80%) …. 🙂

I agree that it’s not sufficient to know if a pastor is qualified just by listening to his sermons or by hearing his answers to questions. I’ve heard it said before that if you really want to know what a pastor is like invite him to a church softball game and call him out at second when he was really safe. Then you’ll know a little more about his character. (Does anyone know where this illustration originates?)

November 24, 2014 3:21 pm

D.L. Payton

Chris
I would need to see some stats on the rarely 80% comment. I know of few pastors who would go to a church on an 80% vote. Granted it has been 20 years since I stood before a Pastor search committee, but the last two churches I pastored had an 85% call requirement in the by-laws. I would not want to go to a church with an 80% vote.

I have worked with many committees here on Montana and the calls are more than 80%. However, I recognize the difference between here an there.

So, you guys help me, what has been your experience in the traditional states as it relates to a % call. Help me to catch up with the times. If Chris is right I think we have identified the problem of unhappy pastor/church.

I think we can all agree with Chris that it SHOULD always be 100%, while disagreeing on whether to realistically expect that number. My church bylaws require 75%. I believe I was voted into my non-Senior Pastor role at 78%. However, there were outside factors (apart from me) that contributed to that number…factors I was informed about…such that I felt comfortable accepting the call anyway, since the other 3 pastors/Elders, and deacons, all supported me. 7.5 years later, I have no regrets.

There are always circumstances that might make a pastor want to accept a tough assignment with less than 100% support…and others that might make a pastor run away from a church, even if they did call him at 100%.

As William said…we have to work within the reality…even while seeking to improve that reality.

November 24, 2014 6:23 pm

Tom Bryant

Chris,
Maybe I’m not understanding what you said. Are you saying that you bring the person in a few days before they preach on Sunday? But it sounds like you’re suggesting that you take a list of potential pastors and meet with them for a total of 40 hours before they are brought to the church.

Tom, thanks for letting me clarify this a bit more. It is important for the “committee” to spend quality time with each Pastor that is included in their search, and not to depend upon the recordings or preaching style. Time with the men is critical to the committee to begin to understand if the man is qualified or not. At best, the search committee can only bring to the church those men they “think” may be qualified (definitely a difficult and risky task). So, the greater amount of time the better.

It would obviously be better to spend far more than 40 hours (simply a minimum in my mind), because qualifications are not based upon speaking ability, or presentation. The qualifications of the man is what your after.

Hope that helps.

November 24, 2014 10:45 am

Tom Bryant

Truthfully, it makes it more unrealistic for the committee. This is not for a pastor, but we have just finished our search for an Associate Pastor. But to have expected search team people to have spent 40 hours with each of our 5 finalists would mean they were working a full time job as a search team along with a f/t job in their work.

I like and appreciate what Mike said in the original post. We tried to keep people informed. When we decided that a person didn’t meet our search criteria, we informed them. We let the people whom we kept know also. I tried to fashion the search process in light of what I had experienced in the “meat market” of pastoral candidating.

Tom, believe me, I understand where you are coming from. It does seem unrealistic. But, just think about what you said. “This is not for a pastor, but we have just finished our search for an Associate Pastor.” What is the difference?

40 hours is the bare minimum…. If that is unrealistic, then it is what it is. To Mikes point,… a man of God should demand of your church, the time or just move on. How can either the man or the church understand what they are getting without some time to evaluate his qualifications?

We may be talking about two different things here.

November 24, 2014 11:23 am

Tom Bryant

Chris,
I think we are talking about 2 different things. I think there is a world of difference between being a lead pastor and an associate pastor.

But I think the bigger difference is that you’re talking about an elder ruled church and I don’t think that is what the Scriptures teach.

But this is not what Mike wrote about so I won’t chase this rabbit anymore.

November 24, 2014 3:09 pm

glenn

Vance Havner said, “A committee is the unqualified, nominated by the unwilling to do the unnecessary.

When was the last time someone from the search committee brought on a pastor or group of them to choose the next oil executive or CEO of a food corporation?

That’s right, the pastor may know a bit about it but he is unqualified.

WE have a worldly system with often worldly, well meaning?, people coming together to determine who will be the spiritual leader.

Talk about needing a miracle–yet most churches still do it the same old “democratic” way.

Glenn, I agree… it is a bit of a worldly approach that the SBC coddles today. But, I would also add that the congregation is critical in the “aspiring” that the Apostle Paul speaks of to Timothy and Titus.

When men aspire,… they must, emphasis on must, meet all the minimal qualifications that Holy Spirit has placed on the Elder (Pastor) day after day. The congregation is intimately involved in that process and expectation. Elders can lead, present, encourage, and bring other qualified men in front of the congregation, as those in the church can….but the congregation must be in 100% agreement and affirm these men.

If you have Elders, begetting Elders without the congregation….you run into a myriad of problems. The congregation is the key….and at 100%.

November 24, 2014 10:18 am

glenn

If my wife and I were going to get a puppy for our children, we would let them hash out their preferences and take them shopping, and let them choose, vote, fume and whatever else children will want to do. Then vote again if necessary.

If we are getting a sitter or a nanny or a care-giver,
my wife and I will vet and chose this person without their assistance or curious blend of a “shopping list” (cute, nice hair, good with pets, outgoing and vivacious, great public speaker–on and on) We know what their sitter would be like if they had full choice.

Then we come to our children and show them what our love, care and wisdom offers. This person is bringing resources and direction they cannot understand. We tell them that we are unanimous and that we rest knowing that they will be well cared for and safe in our absence.

The SBC never told us how we had to select our staff.
The democratic committee approach just came on the scene from executive influences of church members and refused to go away. We have lived with the consequences ever since. We keep wondering why children can’t and won’t make more mature and spiritual decisions. And yes, we just keep expecting different results. Committees will become then the anti-virus that is protection against the previous poor choices they made.

Let them choose carpet color, van or bus, brick or wood.
But when it comes to ministry staff for the congregation, we need a body of council and wisdom.

Most of these committee members can quote Roberts Rules of Order verbatim but choke on remembering one sentence from Jesus.

I say that we leaders are careless to assume and assign committees to the work for which God holds us accountable.

Church members will trust proven spiritual leadership that has stayed long enough to earn it. “Long enough” is more than the 3.5 year average.

Again,… I don’t disagree that committees are spurious at best, yet to discount all members as part of the solution is not a good practice either. All members of the body of Christ have specific gifts that are used in the church for its edification, so it is important to take time to understand the qualifications of the man, whether he is from the current congregation, or from the outside. If he is from the outside….. you must take a good bit of time…how else will you know he is qualified?

So, if you are a qualified Pastor (Elder) and you are being called upon by a congregation that is not familiar with you at all…. my recommendation is to demand that you spend a great amount of time with that church. But, if the church is set on just getting you through the “committee”, in the same ole SBC way….you might want to move on and save yourself some frustration. Gracious…. would you not want to know the people in the church as well and have them understand your qualifications as deeply as possible?

November 24, 2014 1:01 pm

Lydia

because those you expect to pay your salary are just like children? are you sure you don’t want to rethink your illustration?

yes Lydia,…. there is not one member that is more important than another. Differing gifts only, yet all owned by the Holy Spirit!

I didn’t mean to get this discussion over on the “lets figure out what an Elder means” trail. So, Mike I apologize for that one.

The bottom line that I am trying to communicate for this specific post is,..in the most simple way…. is know if the guy qualifies to be your Pastor before you call him, and don’t depend on digital recordings or one or two back pew viewings. Go dig in with the man,…make it as open as possible. The more open you can make it, the more depth and time will be afforded you. Over communicate with all you have on the hook, if thats the way you do it!

And if the congregation voted against your pick, would all the elders be fired?
Or… Are you saying that the elders pick the next leader without congregational consent, because elders know elders, elders can vet elders, and elders understand accountability? If so, then I guess you have little expectation of your congregation, because surely they wouldn’t understand accountability, or the qualifications of a pastor from 1 Timothy, Titus, etc. Also, I would think only Elders could manage the finances for similar reasons, be the only ones who could lead bible-studies, etc. (This is all tongue-in-cheek, but only to some extent).

The overwhelming majority of Baptists (certainly SBC) is a congregational denomination of churches and they do not (typically) have “ruling elders.” If one of the elders were on the search-committee your fears could be voiced. If you think that there are no men (or women) of intellectual capabilities that can evaluate prospective members, well…

By the way, it seemed the post was more about search committees (in general) not following up with every resume they receive, not about the veracity of a committee’s ability to review and vet perspective pastors versus elders and their ability or responsibility.

Church committees will be undertrained and not have proper protocols in place. The prospective pastor might as well get accustomed to that. That said, I suggest:

1. It is natural to get hopes up when a resume is sought, when a sermon tape is requested, or questionnaire sent. Who knows? The committee may be doing this for one, five, or fifty candidates. When you relply, it is acceptable to ask for a response and then follow up with an additional request if needed. Being asked for a resume means…basically…nothing.

2. Some committees look at one person and completely start over if that one doesn’t work out. Some juggle several promising prospects at once, concentrate on one, then move to the second, third, etc. If you are uncomfortable with this process, ask to be removed.

3. At whatever point you would look at a single church that has expressed serious interest in you, it is proper for you to ask if they are doing the same. If they are not, then you need not pledge fidelity to that one committee but continue to engage others.

I don’t get extra pay for it but my two part series on ordinary church/pastor search processes is practical, and helpful. Dave paid me a bunch to run it here back in August…I’m still looking for the check.

I always appreciate additional points-of-view but 40 hours minimum face time between a candidate and committee is highly unrealistic, but the candidate could always insist on it and see how that works.

Invariably, these discussions lead to someone declaring that finding pastors from within is the answer. Sometimes it is. But more than sometimes I’d bet you get inbreeding and less quality from it. One of you advocates should write the piece. It deserves its own discussion.

Elders choosing elders where the members of the congregation are all considered to be children is worth a try…if you wish to blow up an SBC church, this is a good way to do it. Presbyterians may find it to work well, though.

William, I appreciate your thoughts here. And, I think you are right. If Dave would approve, I may could put forward a post that address some of the issues surrounding the SBC sausage mill, and how that The Apostle Paul tries to steers us clear of that messy process.

November 24, 2014 2:23 pm

Tarheel

“Elders choosing elders where the members of the congregation are all considered to be children is worth a try…if you wish to blow up an SBC church, this is a good way to do it. Presbyterians may find it to work well, though.”

Hyperbole much?

I am not sure anyone (even those ‘sinful’ polity embracing Presbyterians) would view the congregants in the way you suggest.

I am not either strongly against or strongly for either an “committee” or an “elder” approach – so long as the team is composed of Spirit lead Godly persons – and the active church membership has the final say.

Some group has to vet “applicants” from the dozens of interested men to one and then present them to the church for a vote. It, IMO is completely and utterly stupid for the church vote between two candidates for pastor – that is setting up for a ‘beauty contest’ and dissatisfaction from the start. The church is not a democracy.

Should the church not be satisfied – a no vote (or even a yes vote that does not meet a threshold dictated by bylaws – ours is 75% or one that does not meet the applicants personal threshold – mine has always been 90%) would send the committee (or the elders) back to work.

I’ve already replied to Glenn’s comment and he needs to clarify a few points that both Tarheel and I have noted, which appears to be far more episcopal in govt. than congregational. Perhaps I just misread Glenn, but I don’t know of many SBC churches that have ruling elders.

November 24, 2014 3:44 pm

Glenn

Hi Nate,

In every church I have served:
There is a good percentage of the Deacon body that qualifies as “Elder-Bishop-Presbytery-Overseer”.

I understand “pastor” as function/role, not office.
And no, I don’t make a thing about being called Pastor or Preacher. But I do believe our people need to know what the bible teaches here.

There is also a good percentage of individuals who get “voted in” in as a Deacon in spite of their lack of qualification as Deacon.

The fact that our churches do not recognize the genuine Elders in their midst by assigning them to an office has nothing to do with ones performance as Elder. They cannot not do their function. Multiple Elders is meant to be a safeguard for any church of any denomination.

So as not to drift too very far away from Mike’s original concern of how individuals who are candidate for ministry are treated, I prefer to have Elders/Pastors (they don’t have to be doing it as a vocation) at least present on these committees. A lot of the shenanigans that go on in these committees reflect the absence of such wisdom/individuals.

Neither do I care what denomination I might look like as long as I am being biblical and thorough in my work.

We are recognizing that “common courtesy” may not be so common after all. On another day, let’s talk about “attrition” following the staff member who no longer proves to be desirable. Just another twist of the same game.

“I prefer to have Elders/Pastors (they don’t have to be doing it as a vocation) at least present on these committees. A lot of the shenanigans that go on in these committees reflect the absence of such wisdom/individuals.”

Here’s one point at which I will agree with Glenn:

Both Me and our church’s Senior Pastor were called at nearly the same time. On my committee, there was one current associate pastor and 4-5 laypersons. Once the church selected a Senior Pastor, he was also involved during the final stages of interviewing me. Those people’s inputs were valuable…and if were were to search for another Elder at this point, we would likely all want to be part of that process…rather than leaving it entirely to a lay search committee…if nothing else to make sure that person’s ministry mindset matches our own.

November 24, 2014 6:37 pm

Tarheel

Exactly! I have seen churches develop search committees for pastoral staff and not allow the current pastoral staff to be involved at all…I for the life of me cannot understand why any church with current and staying pastors would not be involved in the search for “new” pastor.

Our bylaws state that current pastors will be involved in the process and must be in agreement with any committee recommendation to the church – after all we are a pastoral team – not a group of pastoral individuals. It only makes sense to involve current pastors.

“Invariably, these discussions lead to someone declaring that finding pastors from within is the answer. Sometimes it is. But more than sometimes I’d bet you get inbreeding and less quality from it. One of you advocates should write the piece. It deserves its own discussion.”

Great point William. Churches are enriched by those from the outside with different perspectives. Perhaps if our associations/networks were more functional, then the standard practice when a church needed an elder and didn’t have one among them would be to ask the pastors in their circles who they had that was looking for a church. But as you say, the system as it stands is unlikely to change much…hybridize maybe, but not be replaced.

The same principle applies when looking at colleges. You want to look at where their professors got their degrees…if all the profs graduated from that same school, you probably want to run away…but likewise, if NONE of those who graduated from there come back to teach, that could be indicative of a problem as well.

Andy, I think you are absolutely right to point out that qualified Pastors can come from inside and outside the church. The key is to have ongoing qualified men. Differing points of experience definitely is beneficial. All three of us that Pastor at our church in Tennessee came from the outside. We are working with men internally, and expect to see that bear fruit naturally as they aspire over the years.

November 24, 2014 8:15 pm

Bennett Willis

It is not easy from the committee’s point of view either.

I wrote a lot more but decided to delete it. The first sentence said it all.

November 24, 2014 2:15 pm

Jason

We can argue over democratic/congregational government vs. elder led/rule all day, but in my personal experience every Baptist church with a number in their name that I have been even remotely involved in was elder ruled in some way. The pastor was never the elder, it was the deacons or some other group ( could even be an individual) that led the church.

To me, the more important discussion is how to get our crisis of unregenerate church membership fixed. I believe that if we could figure out how do to this, it would go a long way in helping to find common ground on the congregational/elder rule discussion.

Jason,
Baptists are elder led and/or congregational ruled for the most part are they not?
I don’t think there are many that are elder ruled.

November 24, 2014 4:25 pm

Jason

I know what the structure is “supposed” to be. I can quote Pendletons and most church by-laws. I know the cliche “we are pastor led, committee run, and congregation appoved.” What I’m saying is that despite what the by-laws say, many baptist churches are run by members. Many (dare I not say all) are a) unsaved or b) certainly unqualified.

The fact that we have a post by Rainer and one like this one showing the problems with search committees are just indicitive of a much bigger problem.

November 24, 2014 4:58 pm

D.L. Payton

Jason

Quite a statement. I think I would need to see some “bona-fidees” to quote John Wayne

“in my personal experience every Baptist church with a number in their name that I have been even remotely involved in was elder ruled in some way. The pastor was never the elder, it was the deacons or some other group ( could even be an individual) that led the church.”

Jason, I think you are confusing the issue. We can all agree that in many churches, some small group of people, or perhaps even one powerful personality, drove the direction of the church. However, to say that those churches are elder ruled is not helpful or accurate. If a church is led by a power-hoarding board of deacons, most of use would agree that is not good…but it is also not elder rule.

As to your larger point, we can all also agree that unregenerate membership is a problem, but it is also one that we will never solve completely this side of the New Creation. We can govern and organize and shepherd our churches as biblically as possible, and there will still be tares among the wheat…there will also be those true Christians who are still immature and fleshly, as Paul describes in 1 Cor. 3. And some of them will end up on committees. This is not to say we should not try to prevent such things, but it means even the best church leadership is not all-powerful over the souls of its people. We must simply do our best, and trust God to build his church.

Oh yes, I think any person who, like me, chooses NOT to be a Senior Pastor has a special kind of wisdom…You’d have to be crazy to want that job!

November 24, 2014 6:40 pm

Tarheel

..and all God’s people said – Amen!

November 24, 2014 6:46 pm

Matthew Jones

I have gotten to the point where I will contact a search committee after a month to at least see if they are still considering me. Sadly, even then, when I have initiated the contact, I get no reply.

Consider this: if someone were to go into the corporate world, start a business and then hired employees the way that churches do, I sincerely doubt that they would ever get the opportunity to get the best and brightest. Yes, that company would occasionally get an employee that was above and beyond due to chance, but more often than not they would get someone who was took the position more out of necessity than because they were called to it.

I have often stated that if ever I am in a position where I am hiring people into a church situation, there will be a great deal of communication between the church and the potential candidates. Not only is this common courtesy in our world today, it shows the love of Christ to those who are attempting to serve Him.

Matthew, that is a good approach. I would also go ahead and send a letter to the church explaining that you expect to hear from them, or go ahead and inform them that you are removing yourself from consideration. Pastors are way too passive in these matters IMHO